I pledged into the Kickstarter and got early access, and I gotta say I've had more fun with it than I did with space engineers so far. The game scarifices physics for creative freedom and usability. It's also more sci-fi, with warp drives and shields. I can understand if the space engineers crowd is more into a "sim" than an "arcade", but check it out on YouTube.

Also, I heard he's reopening Kickstarter pledges due to popular demand!

Sure, but it'll be really rough since I'm on mobile and I've been asked to buy icecream right away.

Dungeon and heroes set up the board: dungeon trying to make it long and difficult and heroes trying for compact. It evens out nice and random.

Dungeon drawn his tokens and heroes get first turn. Heroes can always see what type of tokens the dungeon can use next turn (traps, spawning monsters, buffing attacks), and plan accordingly.

Heroes take actions to move about the board to search rooms for treasure. As the game progresses, events are revealed which lure the players across the board (to end a bad event or take advantage of a good one).

The dungeon places traps and "shadows" about the board to stop heroes. Shadows are face down tokens that spawn a monster when revealed (the value of the monster is hidden, something between "it was just the wind" and "holy shit"). Traps are placed in rooms, and some of those are nothing burgers as well (keeps the heroes guessing if this trap is gonna be dangerous or not a bother). Sword tokens buff monster attacks, and can be used to reveal monsters manually (normally only revealed when a hero walks into line of sight).

Heroes are encouraged to work together (winning as a group is easier than winning alone), but as they take damage they suffer wounds and stress. Too much stress and they get an insanity card, which can range from minor inconvenience to secondary objective to full blown traitor card.

The win condition for heroes is quite simple (leave with x treasure for example), but going insane complicates things. The dungeon can attack and hinder heroes, but driving them insane is the biggest goal as it makes them compete against each other.

I hope that helps. I understand what you group's apprehension could be about a dungeon player: some one who isn't allowed to participate "for real" and has to DM the game. I feel my game avoid that by having the dungeon player actively trying to win the game. Plus, with some heroes going insane, they may be compelled to "switch sides" and help the dungeon player.

Edit: this wasn't as short as I planned. I was supposed to leave 10 minutes ago for ice cream and now I'm in trouble.

The apprehension comes from the usual imbalance that comes from 1vsMany competitive gameplay, so we usually just steer clear as a rule.

Some of the mechanics sound hella interesting (like insanity) but also sound like they could suffer from Betrayal at House on the Hill syndrome where the wrong insanity effect at the wrong time turns a one-hour game incredibly one-sided. Do you find these situations often?

I think this game has a lot of potential, but also needs a lot of work. It really reminds me of Mansions of Madness set in a medieval environment, which doesn't excite me very much. You state that Darkest Dungeon is one of your main thematic influences, and I would draw on that more.

I want to know why these characters are going into the dungeon together. Are we just heroes exploring dungeons? A standard Fantasy Hero theme doesn't really vibe well with the whole stress/insanity model. Darkest Dungeon has a bunch of unlikely heroes with strange backgrounds, allowing more room for interesting abilities and quirks. In a board game where you are controlling a singular character, you want them generally to have a strong sense of identity and personality. Think of the characters in Dead of Winter. They are all familiar tropes, but each one is unique, and many of them are not 'heroes.' The same with Mansions and Betrayal at House on the Hill. I think adding similar color will make your game pop a bunch more. I see the characters on your image page are Canoness and Templar - both have religious ties. I'm not sure if this is intentional, but the characters seem similar in theme and are both holy warriors of sorts. Maybe these characters are disgraced characters trying to prove themselves worthy again? A Paladin who broke his vows. A Wizard who sold secret knowledge to the wrong person? Are they bounty hunters, not because they are good at it, but because they are desperate? There is a lot to play with here, and I think this can sell your game to a wider audience.

I think the mechanics seem solid enough. There is nothing too innovative going on (you say yourself you are taking a lot from other games). If the game played like Dead of Winter: Dungeon Crawler, I would be pretty happy to play it. I have one idea about the stress, though. Instead of a slider, have players take stress tokens face down only they can look at. These tokens have randomized value on it, say 0-3, with 1 being the most frequent. Each sanity card a player has can have different levels. So a card like Paranoid might have something like:

Paranoid
If you have 2 or more stress, you can't explore a room alone.
If you have 5 or more stress, you can only win if you are the player holding the McGuffin (game winning object).
If you have 10 or more stress, you can only win if you are the last player alive.

I think not knowing how insane the other players are may add a lot of distrust between the players, though this would definitely need to be play-tested.

Well, I hope that was helpful and not discouraging!
TLDR: You can definitely make a solid game out of this, but I think you need a bit more of an offbeat theme/characters a la Darkest Dungeon!

Oh! And resources -
I mostly listen to podcasts, and I would check out Game Design Round Table, Ludology, and Board Game Design Lab. I believe each of them have resources about game design on their sites.
And episode 33 of Designer Notes has the creator of Darkest Dungeon going through his design process, though it is long and a bit rambling, but check it out!

I borred the mechanics i liked best from Mansions of Madness, but the game play is thematically more like Darkest Dungeon as a board game. In fact, this whole thing started because I was messing around with making a Darkest Dungeon board game.

The character and theme ideas you mentioned make you seem psychic. It's mostly what I am going for: these Heroes are greedy, disgraced, or self righteous at best. They are working together because they are being paid to. Whether they use that money for charity or debauchery is up to them; whatever makes them sleep better at night.

The thematics haven't really been fleshed out because I've been more focused on getting good mechanics developed. Until the mechanics are perfect, the theme can exist nebulously in my head for now.

I need to play this Dead of Winter. It sounds like I made the same game by accident!

I am intrigued by your stress idea. I've been toying with the idea of having players start with an Insanity card (arguably the most interesting mechanic). Having the quantity of stress also hidden is likewise intriguing. I'll run that idea past my playtesters this week.

Your comment was not discouraging in the slightest! Thank you so much for your feedback.

Many typos, but those don't matter until you start making the official components and rules.

This makes the game have a different light now. People go there in search of treasure, so your victory conditions for the Heroes are always going to be "Escape with the treasures" and thus the victory conditions of the Villains are always going to be "Kill the intruders so they do not escape." Now you don't need goals anymore, which simplifies it. There would be three victory conditions for the heroes:

At least one Hero must escape with 10 Gold.

At least one Hero must escape with 5 Treasures

At least one Hero must escape with an Artifact.

Naturally, Gold is going to be very abundant (and with it's use to reduce stress, it has strategic value as players can choose to use it to avoid insanity or hoard it to win). Next most abundant is Treasures and finally a few Artifacts. To streamline it, have the Treasures be items and weapons that can be used to improve the Heroes' stats. Of course, you can draw Traps or Cursed Treasures as well so that not every item drawn is beneficial. A potential ability for a Villain would be to add more Traps to the bag, or another one could add more Cursed Treasures. You can also have a Villain have the ability to shift the tiles or rotate them. Honestly, you really should add Villains are playable roles for the Dungeon player and have each Villain command unique creatures and have a unique ability. This adds so much more flare to the game.

Now you have a solid core mechanic of exploring in search of items you draw from a bag and trying to escape with a certain amount/types of them. Building around this, the Villain will attempt to hinder your escape by driving you insane, which will always result in the Villain winning. To add spice, the Insanity goals that players can acquire can allow one of the players to also win alongside the Villain which still retains the other main mechanic of juggling Stress and trying to figure out who can be trusted.

Insanity Victory ideas:

Spread the Horror - Escape the dungeon with 2 Cursed Treasures. (Since they would be less abundant, it would be more difficult than with 4 Treasures as a team, but easier than trying to escape with 4 Treasures alone).

Infectious Madness - Escape the dungeon with 19 Stress.

Summon the Elder Gods - Escape the dungeon with the Cursed Artifact. (You would have Cursed Artifacts that give +1 Stress to the carrier every turn and cannot be dropped. It can only be taken by another willing Hero. You would work as a team and give it to the player with the least Stress so as not to drive anyone insane, but if given to the wrong player...)

Have you considered making 1 die different from the rest? Say, at least 1 die from the dice pool needs to be "red" while the rest are white (or whatever), which functions as your "critical" die. There's an RPG I can't remember that uses this.

This "red" die can pass or fail just like any other dice, but a 1 or a 6 on that die indicates a critical fail or success.

The thing is, you can have a critical success or failure independent of you passing or failing the test in question. You can pass a test but in a bad way, or fail a test but in a good way.

Say you roll to bargain with a merchant

Pass, and get a red 6: Get a great deal

Fail, and get a red 1: No deal, asked to leave or he calls the guards

Pass the test, but red die is a 1: You get a good deal, but you need to leave now before the guards arrive

Fail, but get a red 6: No deal, but he directs you to a guy that can help

It avoids the issue where more dice make critical fails more likely. And, it's quite simple. The only problem is trying to quantify or plan ahead what each one will be: it lends itself quite well to narrative gameplay, but could be tricky to use mechanically/predictably.

If you're newer to this hobby or more advanced board games, don't be discouraged by the label of "Ameritrash". Many of the industry's top reviewers enjoy that style of gaming and it's more likely to be what you're looking for as far storytelling-oriented games go.

As u/Antique_futurist mentions below, these labels have less meaning as time passes as increased globalism and interest in the hobby had led to lots of games that use aspects of both.

Just thought I'd share this since "Ameritrash" can often sound negative and have a gatekeeper effect that any nerdy hobby might lend itself to.

So, the main issue GKs face is lack of CP, which is unfortunate because they have two very powerful Stratagems that cost 2CP: Psybolt Ammunition and Psychic Onslaught. You have the requisite units to take advantage of the Stratagems (10x Strikes for 10x Stormbolters for Psybolt and GMDK /w Gatling Psilencer and Heavy Psycannon for Onslaught).

My recommendation is to take a Battalion of Imperial Guard. You have about 1100 points of GK, which leaves 900 points of IG. A Battallion of IG will come to about 180 (2x Company Commander and 3x Infantry Squad), which gives you 5 anchors and +3CP. If you're adventurous, you can theoretically fit a Brigade of IG in 600-700 points but it might be better to just grab some Leman Russes (hell, take a Leman Russ Tank Commander instead of a Company Commander).

Depending on how many CP you end up with, it may be worth looking at the IG Warlord Trait that refunds your CP on a 5+ and the relic that snatches CP on a 5+ when your opponent uses a Stratagem. And then just constantly funnel all that CP into Psybolt and Onslaught. Heck, if your GMDK ends up dying, spend 1CP on Only in Death Does Duty End for that last bit of shooting and then dump another 2CP into Psychic Onslaught and watch him take something with him.

The two Assassins worth looking at are Culexus and Vindicare. Culexus is the hotness and makes for a terrible day for Psykers and works out great as a distraction. Vindicares are great for taking out aura buffers and important characters, though they do have the tendency to simply miss their 1 shot a turn (which can be quite frustrating).

EDIT: This is also assuming you're going with a standard 2000pt list. At 1500, just grab a Guard Battalion and a Leman Russ Tank Commander, give them the CP Hyperloop setup (outlined above) and then funnel CP Powered Bullets into your opponent.

EDIT: Oh, and take the Battle Cannon on the Leman Russes. There are other setups worth considering but Battle Cannons are good for general purpose use that you can't go wrong with them.

I second this guy's ideas. Guard are so hot right now. The battalion will compliment your army well, and think of the modelling opportunities! You could make something really off the wall for guardmen that accompany Grey Knights into battle.

Which regiment style would you recommend? Your comment was mute on that point, but the choice would be significant.

Right? Let me show the math for it- 10 points more for 1 more order and a 2+ BS... mystery solved.

Also, I was quite fired up about the executioner until I read other codices. Too many -1 to hit modifiers our there, the additional AP is not worth becoming useless/too dangerous against flyers, alaitoc, raven guard, jormungandr, etc etc. plus you lose the Battle cannon range

I've have had success with my valhallan executioner tank commander. As a commander, he can order himself to re-roll 1s to hit, which helps with plasma. Hits on 3s, which helps with those -1 to be hit targets. And, as a valhallan vehicle, he is resistant to becoming crippled: he'll be at full strength till 3 wounds left.

Even if I'm gonna suffer -1 to hit, I'll can still overcharge my plasma, confident that I can weather my own overheats.

It's been a nasty surprise for opponents that think I wouldn't dare overcharge to shoot that flyer.

I think we as Dark Angels players have to accept that Deathwing aren’t meant to be played by themselves and that they’re intrinsically linked to both green wing and ravenwing. The book just solidified that. I’m willing to grow as a player and throw in more synergy.

It stings for my friend because he bought them because they were the only all terminator army in the game, at the time. Now, everyone can do all terminators, but most don't want to, and Deathwing are almost the worst at it.

So far I've gotten a lot of use out of the "Fire on my position!" and "Burn them out!" strategems. Against an Ork player I managed to get 3 instances of "FOMP" which led to dinging wounds onto vehicles, nobz, his warboss, and his Big Mek. Combine that with the ability to gain CP back and it becomes even better.

Honestly, it sounds like you like flyers and want us to say that it is okay for you to take them. If that's the case: it's okay dude. Take em.

Lol, maybe. :) I guess I’m also looking for “2 is fine, but you’ll regret stretching for a third even though it gives you an extra CP—the Air Wing Detachment is kind of a trap” if that turns out to be the case.

You are in luck: you'll paint so many guardsmen that you'd want a simple scheme anyway!

My advice you for:

Pick 2 colours you want: the armour colour and the clothing colour. Drab colours probably best for soldiers, like black, grey, brown, green.

Get a skin colour for faces and hands.

Get a stay paint for base coating. Bonus points if it is one of your base colours anyway. If you wanted green clothing, get green spray paint. The armour is easier to paint I find, so for your sake spray in the colour of the clothing.

Get an ink wash! Black or brown is best.

Seriously, get an ink wash. I cannot stress this enough. That crap is painting skill in a jar.

Build a test guardsman or 2 for painting.

Now, to paint:

Spray in the model in the colour you got. Again, might be best if this colour is the colour you want for the clothing.

Paint on the 2 other colours you need, like the armour/gun colour and the face/hands colour. Thin the paint a bit with water first, and don't be afraid to apply several coats of paint.

Thin the paint! This step is as important as the ink wash step!

Once dry, get a big brush and Fukkin BATHE that som'a'bitch in the ink wash. Watch as the model goes from "this is stupid" to "holy shit I can paint!".

I feel like it's just me, but the Imperial guard Valhallan trait works for me. Makes my army very dependable and durable. My tanks are hard to hurt and my men will die before they run away. Great for objective games, tarpits, and doesn't lock me into an immobile playstyle like cadian would.

There's something to be said about knowing my army can weather the opponent shooting phase and not let me down.

Catachan is quite good as well. Makes Manticores and Basilisks bonkers nuts good, especially with Harker around. And then you get S4 guardsmen as a bonus? That in itself is better than many other army traits.

Frankly, if it was to change to being wounds remaining, they'd need to be more explicit in the wording to make that clear. As it stands, we have no reason to believe chapter approved replaces the rulebook rule; it's in addition to.

They looks great! I like the look of the weapons and the cockpit. It's giving me a bit of a cartoon superhero vibe, with a giant upper body and smaller legs.

I've had problems building mechs. You said the torso sorta twists? How about that arm with the ball joint, that track head movement? My mechs always seem to do the crab walk or have hyper extended arms and stuff. Any tips?

Auxiliary support detachments (the one were its 1 slot and gives -1 CP) don't get access to strats ect however this does not apply to the super heavy auxiliary detachment, it should specify this in the faction rules section of the codex.

Well what is supposed to be a Plasma Gun (I was confused at the time) I painted to be a Volkite gun, which is why it’s gold
Actually the Visor was intentionally standoutish. I wanted to play with the technique, and I actually do paint a lot of Blue or Green visors and wanted to do something a little different.

The parts are very nice. They require a little bit of cleanup, but not a significant amount. One thing I will say is that they were very good for painting in sections. And all the parts had sprues connected to places that would later be glued over, so I actually got to paint these relatively quickly.
In terms of material, I’d say it’s a softer resin. Not soft enough that it could just be bent outright, but soft enough that cutting was easy. It was certainly less brittle than that Forgeworld I’ve gotten to work with.